Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 1 of 1 (2.65 seconds)

J.Srinivas S/O Sri.Jayachandra vs G.Dhanalakshmi D/O Govindaswamy on 5 April, 2013

6. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petition filed by the respondent under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic -8- Violence Act ('DV' Act for short) is barred by time under Section 468 of Cr.P.C. It is his further submission that the respondent/wife was not in domestic relationship with the petitioner and she herself has deserted the petitioner. About 1½ years' prior to the date of filing present the petition, the Courts below noticing the said fact being relevant, have come to the conclusion that there exists domestic relationship and has awarded the monthly maintenance. It is his further submission that if a petition has been barred by time under Section 468 of Cr.P.C. the petition has to be dismissed. He draw my attention to the order of this Court in Criminal Petition No.11476/2013 dated 8.1.2014 in the case of Gurudev and Anthor Vs. Jayashree and in another case in the case of J.Srinivas Vs. G.Dhanalakshmi in Criminal Petition No.2419/2009 dated 5.4.2013 and contended that if the petition is barred by time, then under such circumstances the petition has to be dismissed.
Karnataka High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 14 - A Byrareddy - Full Document
1